VENKATESH KRISHNA KHASBAG Vs. BHUJABALLI ANNAPPA GARGATTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal raises the question whether a landlord can redeem a mortgage effected by his permanent tenant who dies without leaving any heirs. The point does not appear to have been covered by authority. The land in suit belonged to the plaintiff's grandfather, Ramji, from whom one More took it on a lease in the year 1863. The land was given to Moro for building a house on the site and Moro agreed to pay an annual rent of Rs. 4-8, The lease embodied the conditions that so long as the house stood on the site, Moro "his bhaubands or such others as there may be" will continue to pay the rent according to the agreement, and in case the shop or the house were to be sold, it was not to bo sold without informing the landlord, and in case a sale was made, a quarter of the proceeds would bo payable to the landlord.

(2.) In 1875 Moro's widow mortgaged the property in favour of the predecessors of defendants Nos. 1. to 3. The tenant died without leaving any heirs, and the present suit was brought by the grandson of the original landlord to redeem the mortgage effected in the year 1875.

(3.) Both the Courts held that the landlord had no right to redeem. There are no words of inheritance in the lease, Exh. 27. But as the land was given for building purposes and the tenancy is an ancient one, there would be a presumption that it is a permanent lease, according to the decisions in Navalram V/s. Javerilal (1905) 7 Bom. L.R. 401, Caspersz Vs. Kader Nath Sarbadhikari (1901) I.L.R. 28 Cal. 738, and Musammat Afzul-un-Nissa V/s. Abdul Karim